On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Steve Dennis <ad...@subcide.com> wrote: > The other thing to take into consideration is Content Management Systems. > The <section> model, while technically a much better document model, will be > much much harder for things such as rich text editors to implement I would > imagine. Due to sections often being visually invisible, the nesting of > invisible elements can get unmanageable and broken very easily if clients > with little understanding of the document model (probably 99% of them) are > editing their own content via WYSIWYG a lot. The non-nested system of the > <h1> - <h6> is much easier due to being single tags with no nesting, and > every element being visually distinct.
Yeah, inserting synthetic sections into arbitrary user-submitted content (WYSIWYG or not) is more or less impossible to do reliably. This was suggested for MediaWiki <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6104>, but you can't do it. Consider something like (adapted from the bug report) <h1>Widget Sales by Year</h1> <table> <tr colspan="2"><th> <h2>Widget Sales for 2006</h2> <tr><th>Month<th>Number ... </table> It's not even allowed to insert a <section> in the right place here, actually, so this particular example goes beyond automation problems. IMO, it's not reasonable to suggest that it's inappropriate to put headings in tables -- you could have a very long table and want its sections to show up in your table of contents. But you can't use any sectioning elements here.
